List Mgmt. 2016 GFC National Draft & DFA Thread-please see Mod Announcement Page 50 post #1228

[year of the cat]

Emma hardly narrows the field down for us. But if SPP is available I'd say that Wells couldn't call his name any quicker!

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Emma hardly narrows the field down for us. But if SPP is available I'd say that Wells couldn't call his name any quicker!

It would be an interesting test of the 'best available' theory. On one hand if he is there at 24 he is likely to be the BPA (unless someone like florent has slid as well) but on the other he is a carbon copy of caddy (albeit a superior version IMO). Given the rationale that we traded caddy because we didnt have enough midfield gametime to fit him into it would be strange to draft the same type and overlook more pressing needs. Anyway the fact that emma has the field wide open for our picks shows the draft is pretty even and unpredictable.

 

[year of the cat]

It would be an interesting test of the 'best available' theory. On one hand if he is there at 24 he is likely to be the BPA (unless someone like florent has slid as well) but on the other he is a carbon copy of caddy (albeit a superior version IMO). Given the rationale that we traded caddy because we didnt have enough midfield gametime to fit him into it would be strange to draft the same type and overlook more pressing needs. Anyway the fact that emma has the field wide open for our picks shows the draft is pretty even and unpredictable.

I think that if SPP is there you'd just have to call his name. I get your bit about Caddy, but this guy is superior as you say. Doubt he will be there though.

I'd say that Emma is struggling big time to assemble her phantom this year.

 

[MaybeItsGreg]

It's frustrating that the measurements of these players seem to vary from site to site, analysis to analysis. Sheehan has McLarty listed at 197cm, but the draft machine says 193, and I've seen Stewart listed everywhere from 191cm to 186. Every time I read about him he's lost a centimeter. By draft night even Caleb Daniel will tower over him.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I think that if SPP is there you'd just have to call his name. I get your bit about Caddy, but this guy is superior as you say. Doubt he will be there though.

I'd say that Emma is struggling big time to assemble her phantom this year.

Yeah i tend to agree and i suppose its the same debate north will have with brodie i.e. the last player type they need but might be too good to overlook at 11. It will be interesting to see what happens with SPP i think it sounds like he wants to play for wce-12 might be a reach for them but no way he gets to their second pick. One of many hard to predict in an open draft.

 

[Groundhogerzday]

Has anyone heard or seen this kid .... Oliver Hanrahan ? 183 small forward from StKevs apparently we are interested.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...m/news-story/a7fa43ea5e5cf2561e9af3a0cdb05114

So I've heard from a few sources Oliver Hanrahan quit the TAC cup at the start of the season due to 1st XI school cricket commitments and at the Melbourne cricket club premier cricket. Gun cricketer apparently but seems like he's a better footballer, similar pathway to the afl as Easton Wood from Geelong grammar. Electric speed and skills but seems like he's need to get more size on him and development for next level

 

[Stan The Caddy]

If we were going to pick a really small player i would like it to be zac fisher. Such a good player and has played well at senior level already.

I like that bloke. He seems to have hard edge to him which I like.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-draft-2016-clubbyclub-guide-part-two-20161118-gsson1.html

Emma's assessement of us for this Friday.

I was expecting better from her to be honest. It was very broad and really gave readers such as us very little at all.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I was expecting better from her to be honest. It was very broad and really gave readers such as us very little at all.

She is being very broad to give us much info as possible to readers of each club when she does the Phantom Draft on Thursday she will give more specific picks. That said it's a very even draft and it's also unusual in that some clubs have multiple selections (Gold Coast have 4 inside 10 and Port and Sydney both have 2 first rounders) and only 6 of the first 23 picks belong to Victorian clubs which makes it very hard to predict the draft order. I think she will get a lot more of the picks in her phantom draft wrong than what she usually does in most years.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

So I've heard from a few sources Oliver Hanrahan quit the TAC cup at the start of the season due to 1st XI school cricket commitments and at the Melbourne cricket club premier cricket. Gun cricketer apparently but seems like he's a better footballer, similar pathway to the afl as Easton Wood from Geelong grammar. Electric speed and skills but seems like he's need to get more size on him and development for next level

Sounds like a good smokey for 64/71.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

She is being very broad to give us much info as possible to readers of each club when she does the Phantom Draft on Thursday she will give more specific picks. That said it's a very even draft and it's also unusual in that some clubs have multiple selections (Gold Coast have 4 inside 10 and Port and Sydney both have 2 first rounders) and only 6 of the first 23 picks belong to Victorian clubs which makes it very hard to predict the draft order. I think she will get a lot more of the picks in her phantom draft wrong than what she usually does in most years.

Maybe, but she could still give a better idea to her readers of what the team needs are and what they might be looking for. It's written in a way to keep her reputation in tact rather than giving the readers any insight as to what recruiters might be specifically looking to draft.

She's the one journo that I expected better from.

 

[GFrost]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...e/news-story/7bacd97aec3364ab17233da8cb28db0a

Sam Landsberger tries to solve the top-20 puzzle while looking at who’s in the mix for late-pickers Geelong, Richmond, Hawthorn, Collingwood, St Kilda and Melbourne.
........
GEELONG enters at No.24 and is believed to have interviewed Oliver Florent on Saturday. Key forward and elite runner Josh Battle would also suit.
The Cats have shown interest in St Kevin’s student Oliver Hanrahan, who looms as a late selection or rookie pick. He has been likened to Hawk Taylor Duryea.

ST KILDA would walk away beaming if Oliver Florent is available at No.23.
Most think he belongs far higher, but is unlikely to be picked by a non-Victorian club and they hold 17 of the first 22 selections.
Florent’s dad Andrew died in August and interstaters are wary of taking him away from his family. Would provide the touch of class the Saints need.

 

[dazbroncos]

There was discussion earlier about the Rookie listing of Simpson. It appears from what I read, a Rookie FS pre selection guarantees his selection in the Rookie draft provided he is not taken in Pre season or ND.

So basically, if he slides though he is ours.

Now whether that means we are compelled to use our Rd1 rookie pick or any rookie pick we have I dont know.

Go Catters

 

[Pure_Ownage]

There was discussion earlier about the Rookie listing of Simpson. It appears from what I read, a Rookie FS pre selection guarantees his selection in the Rookie draft provided he is not taken in Pre season or ND.

So basically, if he slides though he is ours.

Now whether that means we are compelled to use our Rd1 rookie pick or any rookie pick we have I dont know.

Go Catters

Its basically our last rookie pick (same as with the rookie listed academy players their clubs add them with their last rookie pick) and we lose one rookie pick so say we had 4 rookie picks we keep our rnds 1 2 and 3 rookie picks lose our rnd 4 rookie pick and simpson is added to the list.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...e/news-story/7bacd97aec3364ab17233da8cb28db0a

Sam Landsberger tries to solve the top-20 puzzle while looking at who’s in the mix for late-pickers Geelong, Richmond, Hawthorn, Collingwood, St Kilda and Melbourne.
........
GEELONG enters at No.24 and is believed to have interviewed Oliver Florent on Saturday. Key forward and elite runner Josh Battle would also suit.
The Cats have shown interest in St Kevin’s student Oliver Hanrahan, who looms as a late selection or rookie pick. He has been likened to Hawk Taylor Duryea.

ST KILDA would walk away beaming if Oliver Florent is available at No.23.
Most think he belongs far higher, but is unlikely to be picked by a non-Victorian club and they hold 17 of the first 22 selections.
Florent’s dad Andrew died in August and interstaters are wary of taking him away from his family. Would provide the touch of class the Saints need.

Florent would be a fantastic result for us afyer how he played in the TAC finals although i expect st kilda to take him the pick before us. As i mentioned with vic clubs only having 6 of the first 23 picks it will see him slide. Even if he is gone there will be some other good outside mids available for us to pick though.

 

[Larry Donohue]

Florent would be a fantastic result for us afyer how he played in the TAC finals although i expect st kilda to take him the pick before us. As i mentioned with vic clubs only having 6 of the first 23 picks it will see him slide. Even if he is gone there will be some other good outside mids available for us to pick though.

A little silly when he says florent will be taken by saints in his next breath.

 

[Budda 230]

Yes and no-I think it is a very good draft but not so for our needs. When you look at most mocks having guys like Clarke and Fisher and Graham and Scharenberg and Atley and Poholke being taken outside the top 30 clearly it's a deep draft but the issue for us is most of those guys are inside mids and the best available player with our later picks is likely to be an inside mid which we don't really need. So the recruiting team will need to talk this week and decide whether we take slightly inferior players at those later picks to cover needs or whether we take a couple of inside mids and accept it means we will be trading another inside mid out in 1-2 years like with Caddy. The issue is the draft doesn't have hugely good depth in key forwards which we really need (the top 3 or 4 kpfs are good but there is not much beyond that) or in really skilled wingers/outside mids which are our biggest needs, the better depth is in inside mids and key backs neither of which we really need.

On Sam Simpson I like him as a player but he is small and doesn't have a lot of exposed form, I wouldn't realistically rate him in the top 5 small forwards in this draft and most small forwards go as rookies anyway. I think it's pretty likely he will be passed over especially if there is only around 70 live picks on the night. That said I do think our decision to only nominate him as a rookie is curious, it makes me think we have a player or two specifically in mind for our 3 4th rounders as we did with Menegola last year, and we want maximum flexibility to take that player.

Geelong's needs really aren't that relevant to this draft. Immediate needs are certainly a topic of discussion, but unless Andrew McGrath magically slides to our first pick, this draft won't be solving any current problems soon.

Wells won't be selecting on a needs basis for the sake of it when the specific talent isn't there, especially when it comes to a long term view. Everyone knows this is a strong draft for small/medium sized talent, so why not load up? Obviously if the tall options are available take them, but why reach when you know there is genuine KPP depth in 2017 and rare midfield/flank options late this year? A rebuild is inevitable within around 5 years, it would be nice having good midfield talent beginning to peak to avoid a complete bottom out.

Excluding Cyril, there is hardly a decent small forward in the competition that had true exposed form as a 17-18 year old. You really have to judge on attributes/scope and Simpson ticks more boxes than most. He isn't just one of the smartest players in his categories, but in the entire draft. Not sure why his size is being discussed because at 180cm, he is taller than all other crumbing options like Ainsworth, LeBois, Stengle, Daicos, Fisher, Baker & Brown. He is an acceptable AFL height. He is light at 65kg, but it must be considered he has freak skin fold results. I'd be really disappointed if we miss out, but obviously ecstatic as a rookie.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

 

[year of the cat]

A little silly when he says florent will be taken by saints in his next breath.

Yes, unless the Saints have a specific player in mind then it's hard to believe Florent will slip to our pick.

 

[Budda 230]

It looks like the kid has had to overcome a bit too. But a nice size at 193cm and at his young age may grow a few more centimeters. But very little information on him to get any sort of guage on him.




"His curse has been a dodgy shoulder. McLarty tore his labrum in April and it plagued him for much of the year.

Quote
"It's popped out about five times," he said.

"I got cut from the Metro side because of injury, and the form wasn't quite there in the games.

"It's like a roller coaster. But it's the ups and downs that make a roller coaster so much fun."

McLarty is hopeful the shoulder surgery he had in September will spell the end of the issue."


http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...-peers-if-he-was-drafted-20161107-gsk387.html




In the video below ou have to wait for the last highlight in the package to see McLarty

I saw lots of him last year and a bit earlier this year. Competitive fellow. Reads the play really well, definitely looks more comfortable back. Although monstered some lighter KPDs out of the goal square. Apparently measured 197cm at the combine, so looks to have already grown.

He must be a great man if Jimmy is his hero

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

 

[Roo Beauty]

Hey guys, sorry for the intrusion. I was wondering how many selections you guys have to make on Friday night, based on list spots, etc. I'm doing a phantom draft and need this info.

For example North has to make 4 selections because we have 4 primary list spots open. Appreciate the help!

 

[year of the cat]

Hey guys, sorry for the intrusion. I was wondering how many selections you guys have to make on Friday night, based on list spots, etc. I'm doing a phantom draft and need this info.

For example North has to make 4 selections because we have 4 primary list spots open. Appreciate the help!

We'll take at least 5 players, possibly 6. Most likely 5 though it appears.

 

[JD Tomahawk]

What about Brandan Parfitt.

 

[strauchnyy]

My hope:

24: Florent

Others happy with: Witherden, Hayward, Marshall (although all will probably be gone).
Dont want: Gallucci (kicking not up to standard and looks bust to me), Kerr or any other 'reaches' this year - it hasn't worked for us lately.

38: Willem Drew

Others happy with: McLarty, Atley, Rotham, C.Cox, B.Cox, Cumming, Ridley

42: McLarty

Others happy with: as above

63: LeBois

Others Happy with: Judah Dundon, Josh Begley, Rioli

71: Dundon

Others happy with: as above

 

[year of the cat]

My hope:

24: Florent

Others happy with: Witherden, Hayward, Marshall (although all will probably be gone).
Dont want: Gallucci (kicking not up to standard and looks bust to me), Kerr or any other 'reaches' this year - it hasn't worked for us lately.

38: Willem Drew

Others happy with: McLarty, Atley, Rotham, C.Cox, B.Cox, Cumming, Ridley

42: McLarty

Others happy with: as above

63: LeBois

Others Happy with: Judah Dundon, Josh Begley, Rioli

71: Dundon

Others happy with: as above

Nice list. Aside from McLarty I'm in agreement pretty much with the rest.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Geelong's needs really aren't that relevant to this draft. Immediate needs are certainly a topic of discussion, but unless Andrew McGrath magically slides to our first pick, this draft won't be solving any current problems soon.

Wells won't be selecting on a needs basis for the sake of it when the specific talent isn't there, especially when it comes to a long term view. Everyone knows this is a strong draft for small/medium sized talent, so why not load up? Obviously if the tall options are available take them, but why reach when you know there is genuine KPP depth in 2017 and rare midfield/flank options late this year? A rebuild is inevitable within around 5 years, it would be nice having good midfield talent beginning to peak to avoid a complete bottom out.

Excluding Cyril, there is hardly a decent small forward in the competition that had true exposed form as a 17-18 year old. You really have to judge on attributes/scope and Simpson ticks more boxes than most. He isn't just one of the smartest players in his categories, but in the entire draft. Not sure why his size is being discussed because at 180cm, he is taller than all other crumbing options like Ainsworth, LeBois, Stengle, Daicos, Fisher, Baker & Brown. He is an acceptable AFL height. He is light at 65kg, but it must be considered he has freak skin fold results. I'd be really disappointed if we miss out, but obviously ecstatic as a rookie.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

Good post. Some quick responses:
-I agree you don't take an inferior player on a needs basis, I was talking about if it's a 50/50 between two players of equal talent then focus on needs (which I think it may be a 50/50 as this draft is quite even). Sorry I probably wasn't clear how I explained that previously.

-On the load up on quality despite needs I agree although I would say if you are going to go that way your recruiters and contracts guys need to be in sync. For example we loaded up on talls a few years ago and had heaps but we kept letting them come out of contract at the wrong time and hence our returns have been bugger all. For e.g West went for pick 41, Walker for 42 (with Jansen) Kersten for 63 Vardy for 72 and Clark and Brown delisted. West got us the best return (41 used on Kolo) despite being probably the most inferior player of the lot, because he was under contract. For example with Caddy I felt we should have got our 2017 1st back from Richmond which will probably be 14-16 so we got 8 spots less than what we should have got but because he was under contract we didn't get completely screwed whereas when players are out of contract you usually do. So it's all well and good to say let's get inside mids or speedy players or small forwards or key backs because there are lots of quality ones in this draft but that strategy needs to acknowledge we will end up with an excess and having to trade out some players of that type, so we need to have them under contract when it happens.

-With regards to next year it's uncertain how good that crop will be it's too early to tell and also its unlikely we will have a first rounder unless Motlop leaves. So sure if there are no good talls left by 24 let's see what happens next year but if there is a good tall left by then we ought to pick it (assuming no other strange sliders).

-On the small forwards I like Simpson but I rate all of Ainsworth (will go top 10 obviously) Bolton Fisher Brown Daicos (he is lazy but very talented) and even LeBois higher, he does have the right attributes but I wouldn't pick him inside 60 and I am comfortabl waiting til the rookie draft with him.

Yes, unless the Saints have a specific player in mind then it's hard to believe Florent will slip to our pick.

Depends on the order all it takes is one or two sliders and it changes. At the moment I would guess we are looking at something like (obviously some guesswork here)
1. Essendon-McGrath/MCCluggage/Ainsworth
2. GWS - McGrath/MCCluggage/Ainsworth
3. Brisbane- McGrath/MCCluggage/Ainsworth
4. GC-SPS or Taranto
5. Carlton/SPS or Taranto
6. GC-Scrimshaw
7. Fremantle-SPS/English/Logue
8. GC- Bowes (matched bid Fremantle)
9. GWS-Setterfield (matched bid Sydney)
10. Sydney- Logue/Simpkin/Brodie
11. GC-Brodie/English/Logue
12. Nth Melb-Simpkin/Scrimshaw/Florent (will be one of these three unless Brodie is still avail I reckon
13. WCE-SPP/Brodie/Berry
14. GWS-Perryman (match Adelaide bid)
15. Adelaide-SPP/Venables/Galluci/Hayward
16. Port Adelaide-Berry/Hayward/Venables/Witherden
(GWS pick will have already gone here matching bids)
17. Brisbane-English/Berry/Venables/Witherden
18. Port Adelaide-Battle/Marshall
19. Bulldogs-Battle/Marshall (I wouldn't rule them out of bidding on Mcraedie here if both are gone)
20. Sydney-Witherden/Venables/Galluci (although there keeps being nose about them being linked to Luke Ryan here)
21. Essendon-Will take Marshall if still on the board IMO otherwise Venables (obvious PEGS connection here) or Galluci are chances
22 and 23. Brisbane-won't take Florent. Will probably take English if still here and one or two of Venabes/Galluci/Witherden/Hayward or Bolton depending on who is left.
24. St Kilda-I doubt they take another small forward/small mid after Gresham in the first round last year. Probably either Florent (which is what I expect) or SPP if still there or Venables

Realistically any of the guys I have listed from Port Adelaide's first pick onwards could still be there for us and one or two probably will be. In addition it's likely that Ridley both Coxes and Kerr will be there for us and a lot of the academy guys won't have been bid on yet.

Someone like English has a wide range as clubs dont take rucks early unless they really need them so if Freo don't take him he might get to Brisbane at 17 or further and that affects the Dogs as they then have to choose between a KPF like Marshall or the ruckman. SPP could either go really early to WCE or Adelaide or fall a fair way if they don't take him. If some of the talls fall through further then that probably means Florent doesn't get taken by Essendon or St Kilda and does fall to us. The fact that so few of the picks belong to Victorian clubs makes it very unpredictable.

Hey guys, sorry for the intrusion. I was wondering how many selections you guys have to make on Friday night, based on list spots, etc. I'm doing a phantom draft and need this info.

For example North has to make 4 selections because we have 4 primary list spots open. Appreciate the help!

We have 33 on the senior list so we can take up to 7 picks but we only went for 38 on the senior list last year I expect we will go for 38 or 39 and use 5 or 6 picks and pass on the 7th.